User talk:Moishe Rosenbaum

Vetinari. Vampire?

I was just listening to Guybrush and friends on Pratchat's Night Watch episode. They were discussing young Vetinari, and how Lord V always plays the long game politically. Or the longest game. And they discussed his relationship with his "Aunt," who (Pratchat suggested) may very well not be an actual Aunt. As well as the similarities between Lady Margolotta and Lady Meserole.

I remember the gut punch I felt the first time I read Unseen Academicals when Glenda says in her internal monologue, "they say he [Vetinari] is a vampire..."

It seemed a throwaway line, as she was musing (I think) about the upcoming dinner being thrown for the footballers by the Wizards, to which Vetinari was invited. But Pratchett doesn't throw away lines.

I've always thought of Vetinari as Ankh Morpork's version of Margolotta.

[Okay, time for class, more to come here. I have some textual evidence I'll bring forth. In the meantime... have we ever seen Vetinari out in the direct sunlight? He wears the signet ring that nearly burns Moist at one point... probably we have, but there's that line repeated multiple times about how he seems to be awake and working at all hours...]Moishe Rosenbaum (talk) 00:54, 17 April 2022 (UTC)

Now... some evidence-like substance.

We know that reformed B-word-less vampires transfer their craving, their *obsessiveness*, to something else. Coffee. Photography. Political manipulations in Uberwald. Vetinari is obsessed, too - with the city of Ankh-Morpork. He even says so, in a line that seems like it should be accompanied by a maniacal laugh, I think in Making Money: "It's about the city. It's always about the city."

I'm not sure where I stand on Vetinari's blood-relation (sorry, wrong word) to Meserole. I agree with Pratchat that they seem to say "Aunt" way too often. But... My own crazy thought is that Lady Meserole and Margolotta are *THE SAME PERSON*. And she could indeed by Vetinari's aunt. In NW, she swoops in from far away and insinuates herself into powerful political circles, creating change that works to her benefit in the long term. Who says she didn't swoop into Uberwald after the Dark War to do the same thing, the endgame of which we saw in T5E? She behaves differently while executing her machinations in Ankh Morpork, but she blends in culturally for her ends. I suspect she recognized that Nephew Havelock would be the right person at the right time in AM, so she installed him and now they rule two parts of the continent jointly.

Or not.

I have always felt that Pratchett himself had a long game in mind for these characters, but ran out of Time to tell the story. Vampires, though... live many human life spans. Moishe Rosenbaum (talk) 01:08, 17 April 2022 (UTC)

This conspiracy theory mania is getting out of hand. Have you found any basement dungeons in pizza parlours that don't have basements lately? Sam Vimes doesn't miss much and if the Patrician were a Vampire he would be very annoyed and we would have heard about it. Never mind that Angua would smell him at fifty yards. On the other hand, I always doubted that Lady Roberta was a blood relation (although I wrote a fanfic on the idea that she was his mother's sister, just on the Pratchettian idea of "what if?"). She may just have noticed him as someone useful to the movement, or just interesting to a cougar (female "funny uncle"?). It's all speculation. I also suggest that she's an agent of Margolotta's intelligence network and the connection between M and V. --Old Dickens (talk) 02:34, 17 April 2022 (UTC)

However improbable, the Vampire idea isn't original. See Talk:Havelock Vetinari#Age quibble. --Old Dickens (talk) 03:13, 18 April 2022 (UTC)

True, Vetinari's devotion to the city hasn't been explained (to me). Why does the greatest mind of his generation apply his talents to the care and feeding of this big dirty, smelly, grotty accumulation of humanoids? Of course, it might be that it's the grandest vision of SimCity in the metaverse and the only game that challenges him. He seems to get nothing out of the office except the chance to play the game (and perhaps to improve the city, which would lead back to the original question). --Old Dickens (talk) 04:31, 20 April 2022 (UTC)

I played SimCity once, in something like 1994. That's a fascinating idea. I wonder, are there any direct references that could be to the video game? The only thing I can think of offhand is, if you didn't put in the correct code from the manual, then the game assumed it was being played with pirated software, and your city was attacked by a dragon within minutes. (I know your SimCity comparison is not necessarily literal; you've described the most likely Vetinari motivation I can think of. Yet I wonder... TP plays multidimensional chess, there could easily be subtle references that I'd miss.)

You're right that Angua would sniff Vetinari out instantly if he were in fact a vampire. I can't think, though, of a scene with both Angua and Vetinari in. Look, you're probably right that I'm engaging in Koom Valley Codex-level conspiracies here. But abf is defunct. If not on my talkpage, then where else?  :-) Moishe Rosenbaum (talk) 19:37, 23 April 2022 (UTC)

Annotations

I wish we had the old Biers discussion page for administrators, but no... You apparently allow editing of annotations, which hasn't been usual, annotations being regarded as personal opinions which couldn't be gainsaid. This seemed to make them very popular; I spent two years fighting with people about them, but I had no support for any controls. I applaud the recent edit of Rufus Drumknott, but what is the policy?
(You may also need an archive here soon; partly my fault, I suppose.)--Old Dickens (talk) 02:13, 15 November 2022 (UTC)

Huh. I wasn't active in the early years of this wiki, so I must have entirely missed that discussion. On one hand, I am absolutely respectful of a community consensus, and so won't remove others' annotations any more now that I know of how they've traditionally been regarded here; but a consensus from 2006 or so should likely be revisited.

If you're asking my personal view, I suppose I'd suggest that annotations should at least be plausibly specific. That is, if someone's opinion is that a Pratchett scene is based on / related to something in history or literature, they should make their case, and other editors should default to leaving that case visible. However, if the link to Pratchett's scene is in no way specific, we should remove it.

To take an absurd example - let's pretend that Gaspode had just appeared in Pratchett's works in, say, 2010. The annotation that I'd sigh and let stand would say something like "Gaspode the talking dog might be a reference to the talking dog in The Family Guy." The annotation I'd remove would be "Gaspode the dog might be a reference to the basketball playing dog in Air Bud." What's the difference? Plausible specificity. Gaspode's primary distinguishing trait is that he is a dog *who can talk* - as is the Family Guy dog. I don't see any specific relationship between the Air Bud dog and Gaspode, other than them just being talented dogs.

Now, the annotation that would make my heart leap with joy would demonstrate external-to-the-novels evidence that TP was a Family Guy fan, and would show even another layer of specificity in the annotation - perhaps Gaspode had used several phrases directly from the TV show or something. That's the type of annotation that the APF is - was - full of, the kind I'd love to see more of. Yet I kinda think that on a wiki, we have to put up with some of the less-specific annotations in order to get the awesome ones, the same way panning for gold requires one's hands to get quite mucky before the good stuff filters out.

Old Dickens, you're the, well, old hand at administrating here, so I'm just putting in my two pence where I've been asked. I'd love to hear what Guybrush or Jagra or (if they're around) AgProv think nowadays. Happy to move this conversation off my talk page if that'd be better. [Oh, and would you be able to point me to somewhere to learn how to archive? You're right that this talk page is getting long and ancient... :-)Moishe Rosenbaum (talk) 21:13, 16 November 2022 (UTC)

I'd love a new consensus on annotations with some kind of rein on the inanity; we can move to the Mended Drum. My point was always that if an annotation was useful and supportable it should be in the body of the article and editable like anything else. Annotation pages are also available. To archive, just create a page and copy the form from the Discworld & Pratchett Wiki:Mended Drum/Archive 1, correcting the specifics. Then cut and paste whatever chunk you want. I should do one myself. --Old Dickens (talk) 22:59, 16 November 2022 (UTC)
I just came across a precursor to this discussion from 2011! See Discworld & Pratchett Wiki:User talk:Old Dickens/Archive 1#Threshold of evidence. --Old Dickens (talk) 00:58, 17 November 2022 (UTC)

Futbol

oh. yeah. The women have been a power for a while. The men are slowly catching up, but there isn't much excuse for the national side or Toronto FC in a country chock-a-block with immigrants from football-mad countries around the world. (Alphonso Davies isn't a great penalty kicker, unfortunately.) --Old Dickens (talk) 00:16, 2 December 2022 (UTC)

Ah. A big problem with US Men's soccer has been exactly the "chock-a-block with immigrants" issue. Those immigrants were never represented on the national team, or in the US youth system. For all the money US soccer spent, they would have done better simply plucking the best teenager from every New York, Los Angeles, or Houston city park. I'm finally seeing some ethnic diversity on our team - and they're playing well. Go figure. <shrug> Moishe Rosenbaum (talk) 01:39, 3 December 2022 (UTC)

Well, that was quick. Guybrush wins our pool by a point, but Sanity/Leo were always more likely. --Old Dickens (talk) 21:01, 3 December 2022 (UTC)

Blockage

You got one! One point: we don't usually block forever, because that ip will be blocked for whomever inherits it. A week would probably do; I've generally made it six months. --Old Dickens (talk) 00:54, 1 July 2024 (UTC)

Got it! Changing now... Moishe Rosenbaum (talk) 00:09, 4 July 2024 (UTC)

Headquarters says we shouldn't block ip addresses for the time being. Unfortunately, selective unblocking doesn't seem to be available, despite the instruction. --Old Dickens (talk) 15:43, 16 July 2024 (UTC) - Ah, but it's easy with Change Block in the log. --Old Dickens (talk) 17:54, 16 July 2024 (UTC)